TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Dismissal of Writ Petition against Corporation's Actions under Financial Laws</h1> <h3>M/s Chandi Gaschem (P) Limited Versus State of Punjab and others</h3> The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the respondent-Corporation's actions under the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951, and the Punjab ... Writ of certiorari for quashing advertisement for sale of unit being illegal, arbitrary and against the provisions of Punjab Industrial Incentive Code - Held that:- The petitioner had earlier approached this Court by way of Civil Writ Petition challenging the proceedings initiated under Section 29 of State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 by the respondent-Corporation on 20/24.10.1997. The petitioner having withdrawn the earlier writ petition without any permission to file fresh petition on the same cause of action has again sought to challenge the action of the respondent-Corporation after expiry of 15 years. Learned counsel for the petitioner was unable to justify as to how the present petition was maintainable - writ dismissed. Issues:Challenge to advertisement for sale of petitioner's unit under State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 and Punjab Industrial Incentive Code 1992, waiver of penal interest, return of possession of unit with machinery and articles.Analysis:1. The petitioner filed a petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash an advertisement, a letter, and a notice related to the sale of their company unit. The petitioner alleged that the actions were illegal, arbitrary, and against the provisions of the Punjab Industrial Incentive Code 1992. Additionally, the petitioner requested the waiver of penal interest, return of possession of the unit, and related machinery and articles. The petitioner's company had set up a unit for manufacturing gases with financial assistance from Punjab Financial Corporation and Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation. The petitioner defaulted on loan payments, leading to a notice under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951.2. The petitioner claimed to have received a capital subsidy, which was not considered in the project report. The committee sanctioned an incentive for the petitioner, but the company defaulted on payments, leading to the demand for a substantial amount. Despite making payments, the corporation issued a notice for further payments, alleging default due to market conditions. The petitioner made representations, but subsequent legal notices were issued, inviting participation in sale proceedings. The petitioner approached the court after these developments.3. Previously, the petitioner had challenged similar actions by the respondent-Corporation, which resulted in possession being taken over by the Corporation. The earlier writ petition was withdrawn with liberty to approach the concerned authorities for relief. However, the present petition sought to challenge the Corporation's actions again after a significant period. The court found no justification to entertain the present writ petition and dismissed it.In conclusion, the court dismissed the present writ petition challenging the actions of the respondent-Corporation under the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951, and the Punjab Industrial Incentive Code 1992. The court noted the withdrawal of a previous petition with liberty to seek relief from concerned authorities. The petitioner's attempt to challenge the actions after a significant time lapse was deemed unjustifiable, leading to the dismissal of the present petition.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
